European Anglers Call for Tighter Controls on Salmon Farms

A resolution passed at the general assembly of the European Anglers Alliance (EAA), representing the interests of 3 million recreational anglers across 13 European nations, demands that all farmed Atlantic salmon should be produced in closed or contained farm systems.

The EAA has urged all fish farming nations across Europe to pursue rapid development towards sustainability to reduce the impact on wild salmon populations, and urges policy makers to use the 'precautionary principle' and 'polluter pays principle' to ease the transition towards more environmentally friendly and sustainable salmon farming practices.

The alliance argues that closed or contained systems, either at sea or on land, would reduce the infestation of sea lice among farmed fish, reduce the risk of farmed fish escaping into the environment and dramatically reduce the damage done by waste, pollutants and chemical residues from disease treatment entering the natural environment.

“It may come as a surprise to most people that in many rivers there are more farmed than wild salmon," said EAA secretary general Jan Kappel. "The escaped farmed fish compete with and genetically pollute our wild salmon stocks. It is well known that sea lice spread from the salmon farms and harm wild salmon stocks.

To our greatest surprise Norway has banned recreational angling in the Hardangerfjord where salmon stocks have declined due to the impact from extensive salmon farming. This doesn’t make sense. The polluter should be managed before other legitimate and sustainable users like recreational anglers are denied access to what used to be healthy salmon stocks.”

The EAA's comes in the wake of continued controversy over the proposed Galway Bay organic salmon farm, which if green-lighted would be the largest aquaculture facility of its kind in Europe.

Rate this article

Comments (8 posted):

Paul Boote
on
04/09/2013 16:18:44

This is serious, chaps, even if you're "just" a coarse-fisher who never goes anywhere near, in the case of our own farms, Scotland. These farms are a menace to marine life, not just to salmon and any passing sea-trout, whether immature or adult. I stopped buying salmon a long long time ago (able to catch my own until I stopped killing salmon that I'd caught altogether at one salmon season's end in early October 1988), but have been tempted on occasion by the cheap salmon available in quantity and in every supermarket these days. But, as with tuna, so with salmon - I don't, won't. Consider doing the same, or buying a bit less for the barbi as an alternative to meat, maybe...?

Yup. As with farmed salmon, so with all iffy-fishy firms, operations, organizations and individuals: vote with your feet and your wallet. Resist much, obey little, as the U.S. poet Walt Whitman once wrote. Or as Corporal Jones famously exclaimed "They don't like it up 'em....".

bennygesserit
on
05/09/2013 08:44:50

Shame below the waves
Mark couple of points re that link
firstly emotive pictures of fish in distress with that mournful piano playing in the background is a cheap shot or did I miss the point ? Were the makers saying that the fish they showed ( a lot ) was injured because of the way it was stored ? Do you think fish feel pain ?
More importantly the reasons why nutrient mats are not absorbed easily into the eco system seemed to be glossed over - because of global warming ? Because of global warming what ?
Are there any similar studies after a fish farm has been in place for longer I'd like to see pictures of nutrient mats that have been in place for longer. It would seem to good a point to score so I wonder why the makers of the film didn't take the opportunity.
Also the area affected by waste by product from the farm didn't seem that big to me I'd like to see a scale diagram to help me understand more easily.

Paul Boote
on
05/09/2013 09:25:06

Benny, take it from somebody who knows (who refused the offer from an owner-fishing friend** of a manager's job at one of Britain's first and BETTER salmon farms, in 1984 I think it was - I went into rodbuilding for myself instead), these farms fairly CARP on everything around them, sea-louse-up everything swimming nearby (not just salmon), put all manner of pesticides, hormones and chemicals into the watery environment (and into their product), contaminate the gene pool of wild salmon and, quite possibly, produce a very orange (dye in the feed) something that ain't doing you, me or even the cat too much good. Like battery chickens with even bigger environmental fall-out.
** Who, back then, spent a month in Iceland each summer, salmon-fishing, returning with enough excess baggage to ground an Icelandair jet - salmon that he and his parties of fishers had caught. He ate only wild fish - Icelandic fish and Scots fish taken from north and east rivers only - well away from the west coast salmon farms, one of which was his.

bennygesserit
on
05/09/2013 09:47:17

Yesterday I knew nothing about the subject and I would have thought if anything this would have been one of the greenest methods of farming of all - fish live in the sea don't they.
Countryfile on Sunday had a great piece on a guy who was farming mussels in some disused harbour in South Wales where for some reason the water was very plankton rich , wonderfully he frams them by suspending ropes into the water. Seemed very green so my assumption really was the same for salmon farming.
But specifically my assumption was the organic matter would be shifted by crabs and might actually enrich the sea bed rather than , as it seems to , stifle it.
Strangely counter intuitive that it doesn't have a much lower impact.

Paul Boote
on
05/09/2013 09:57:36

That mussel farmer in the old Swansea docks was doing an excellent job - no rubbish in, excellent natural product out. Be nice if salmon could be produced that way, but they can't.
Aside from the environmental fall-out, think of the amount of oily "trash" fish that have to be dredged out of the sea in both Hemispheres to make the pellets that feed them. The Northern Hemisphere was running out of such fish, so hit South Atlantic and Antarctic waters for their krill etc. Very destructive industry.

bennygesserit
on
05/09/2013 10:18:11

for those that can stomach the language [url=http://www.sarf.org.uk/cms-assets/documents/28814-36718.sarf036---final-report.pdf]http://www.sarf.org.uk/cms-assets/documents/28814-36718.sarf036---final-report.pdf I can a little and my Daughter is studying Biology at a good UNI so I ask her to interpret some of the terms for me. I do , sadly , tend to skip about on these things and end up reading about half of the actual content, skim read the method , jump to the conclusions etc.
Still besides the smothering of local habitat with a thick wedge of uneaten food and faeces the other surprise was the generous amount of chemicals these things are dosed with - including peroxide and anti biotics.---------- Post added at 11:18 ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 ----------That mussel farmer in the old Swansea docks was doing an excellent job - no rubbish in, excellent natural product out. Be nice if salmon could be produced that way, but they can't.
Aside from the environmental fall-out, think of the amount of oily "trash" fish that have to be dredged out of the sea in both Hemispheres to make the pellets that feed them. The Northern Hemisphere was running out of such fish, so hit South Atlantic and Antarctic waters for their krill etc. Very destructive industry.
yes for some reason the guy in Swansea docks filled me with Glee